Which report do you believe?
Seymour Hersch
Foreign Policy
Or which committee is informed?
Budget, Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, Intelligence.
Officially war powers and the purse are in the hands of congress.
But the military and intelligence are not just in the hands of the president.
How these committees are informed, is the key to progress or more run around.
Compartmentalized information is the key to our defense being so offensive.
Apparently congress has done as good a job of insulating themselves from responsibility and the adminstration has of blaming them, and excusing themselves. There is evidence that even military commanders to not know what the right hand is doing.* But it is a sure bet that our enemies know more than we can say.
[Preemptive point: Should one need to read the latest? * Given the record of congress and the administration?]
[To put this in semi-clear terms, the president's job is commander in chief and is sworn to defend the constitution. There is a clear record that he has poorly done his job and been given ever more powers by a congress who has not held him accountable and done their's. The sharper point is that of course the president has the power to defend the country as long as he has the ability to defend his actions and is responsible for them. It is necessary to "trust but verify" at home as well as abroad. It is also necessary to make sure that preemption is no longer the policy without such review. And to do so, we must see when it started and when it leaked and which committee knows.]
* Fallon
Monday, June 30, 2008
Update: Looking back.
Keith Olberman catches up.
Obama on FISA
Psst. Keep it under your hat.
[clarification]
[bumped forward]
Obama on FISA
Psst. Keep it under your hat.
[clarification]
[bumped forward]
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Mutiny on the Bounty?
McCain Battery Reward?[*]
Is this change you can believe in?[**]
Is that a mis-taken slap at the "invisible hand"?
Not to mention accountability.[***]
[Meanwhile..."Loving McCain"][****]
[6-30-08 clarification]
[*] wild west energy poster
[**] presumptive straight talk
[***] [McCain Fearmonger Advantage?]
[****] loving media
Is this change you can believe in?[**]
Is that a mis-taken slap at the "invisible hand"?
Not to mention accountability.[***]
[Meanwhile..."Loving McCain"][****]
[6-30-08 clarification]
[*] wild west energy poster
[**] presumptive straight talk
[***] [McCain Fearmonger Advantage?]
[****] loving media
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
What's New?
I may have read enough and hope to get back to more substance later but there is enough psychology embedded in this blog to blow ones mind. (Not to mention the spelling, grammar and punctuation.) (Mine that is.)
What will change? Is McCain running from or running with the likes of Charlie Black as his top advisor? Will he hold him accountable or will he expect change from someone so tied to Reagan and earlier Bush campaigns and administrations? Is this nuance or insanity? Not that logic is the only card, but does it even make sense?
If there is a terrorist attack, how could it be good for a campaign which is trying to argue that the war on terrorism works because we have had no terrorist attacks? Not that it would be convenient for a terrorist attack to be blamed on current policy.
Meanwhile I hope to limit my filtering here, to do a better job filtering everywhere.
What will change? Is McCain running from or running with the likes of Charlie Black as his top advisor? Will he hold him accountable or will he expect change from someone so tied to Reagan and earlier Bush campaigns and administrations? Is this nuance or insanity? Not that logic is the only card, but does it even make sense?
If there is a terrorist attack, how could it be good for a campaign which is trying to argue that the war on terrorism works because we have had no terrorist attacks? Not that it would be convenient for a terrorist attack to be blamed on current policy.
Meanwhile I hope to limit my filtering here, to do a better job filtering everywhere.
Friday, June 20, 2008
The Great Wall Recycled.
My teaser hints at a tangent
of Nietzschean proportions.
Bush Army in Brzezinski's Afghan Trap
Or Rumsfeld's ReDucks
or Donald's Duck and Cover Up History
I will not dig into the depths of it,
or what fell into my inbox from TruthOut.
But to feel we have been there before.
My threads:
Berlin + Wall
Vietnam + Economy
Not a wall
Out of the Blue Summary:The irony of intelligence I have recently heard is the contrast between Truman and Eisenhower over the long and the short of it as far as agency and militancy, not to mention in-corporations of it.
A set-up or by intelligent design?
[6-22-08 Bicameral NOT.]
[Prior Restraint: Post Information ]
of Nietzschean proportions.
Bush Army in Brzezinski's Afghan Trap
Or Rumsfeld's ReDucks
or Donald's Duck and Cover Up History
I will not dig into the depths of it,
or what fell into my inbox from TruthOut.
But to feel we have been there before.
My threads:
Berlin + Wall
Vietnam + Economy
Not a wall
Out of the Blue Summary:The irony of intelligence I have recently heard is the contrast between Truman and Eisenhower over the long and the short of it as far as agency and militancy, not to mention in-corporations of it.
A set-up or by intelligent design?
[6-22-08 Bicameral NOT.]
[Prior Restraint: Post Information ]
Going out on a limb here.
And hoping other branches catch me.
It is all political.
The FISA deal is not as bad as it could be.
I have not dug into the roots too deep, but if there is FISA review for programs, it is a new leaf on a branch. But as far as the immunity go, the three branches of government, are all unprecedentedly political.
Immunity may be retroactive, but review and accountability are still unprecedented.
It is not the corporations that we need to worry about prosecuting in these cases, it is their cooperation. As the tree branches grow, things change, and retro-activity could be cut off or not matter unprecedentedly.
[6-30-08 Olbermann/Dean?]
It is all political.
The FISA deal is not as bad as it could be.
I have not dug into the roots too deep, but if there is FISA review for programs, it is a new leaf on a branch. But as far as the immunity go, the three branches of government, are all unprecedentedly political.
Immunity may be retroactive, but review and accountability are still unprecedented.
It is not the corporations that we need to worry about prosecuting in these cases, it is their cooperation. As the tree branches grow, things change, and retro-activity could be cut off or not matter unprecedentedly.
[6-30-08 Olbermann/Dean?]
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Other tracks.
Business Week and Russert and the Media.
My comment there:
[[[Ed Schultz would be a fit for some shoes here, but I think he enjoys the job he's got too much and could actually be in the running for the whole show. And of course Keith Olbermann would be great, if he was not so great at his present job.]]]
- - - - -
Meanwhile I have been writing in other formats, message board and email. And will get to the following (nfry), later.
- - - - -
When McCain Drops by Steve Rosenbaum
US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes
Broken Laws, Broken LivesPhysicians for Human Rights
Michael Reagan Should be charged for terrorism
or they are right, our freedoms are what gives us terrorists.
How could a wrong be so right? NOT!
She talks about the real America. Will she be heard?
In no particular order:
Kucinich: Impeachment Not "Off the Table"
I hope to be back to these links, but wish that they did not tie in so well, that more will be following. But I will summarize my feeling that McCain may be just a place holder in a strategy where there is too much to loose not to give it more than he's got, and that plays into the way I see them always playing it.
Meanwhile Obama has "flip-flopped"[**] on the Public Campaign Finance System but faces it in a more honest a principled manner than the media can follow or wishes to follow. While McCain may just be a distraction for a sleeper candidate, they cannot come up with one that should not be asked what he or she would do about holding history accountable.
* GE profits are a picture that may not fit full disclosure journalism, economics or environment, but then I acknowledge I don't fit or have the full picture either. Meaning I have taken digs at them, and it does not mean that profits are above principles or question, but that it is another story.
** The Catch-22 for them not us, but we*** can't help it. "Flip-flop" is a charge that was created by those that fear nuance or the work required to do their jobs or an attempt to do too many jobs or diminish those that see your own flip-flops, which maybe is all they can see, since this has created a loop. [[I did not intend to throw the book at a term, but then we are all about the Catch-44. And then there is the actual records. Not that I want to go there, but that may be one of the reasons we are here, with McCain a candidate, not his record, but the difficulty in facing it all, and the actions/reactions that brings.]]
*** "we" does depend on a job sometimes and who "them" is, not to mention the word.(While there may be some typo's or gramatical sloppiness in this post, this line have been double and triple checked mentally, not technologically.)
My comment there:
Not being a regular consumer of his work, I did not have him on a pedestal, but given the nature of the business he was probably the best they could afford. And given the nature of the world, even harder to find one without more of an edge. Maybe as the comments on Kiley have shown.My suggestion to MSNBC is to fill several pairs of shoes in memory of Russert's work. Not as in trying to fill his shoes, but to uphold his several jobs. It will still be difficult. [Maybe David Bender if not Rachel Maddow could fill one or more of those pairs, but not necessarily that they or GE* would want them to fit.]
[[[Ed Schultz would be a fit for some shoes here, but I think he enjoys the job he's got too much and could actually be in the running for the whole show. And of course Keith Olbermann would be great, if he was not so great at his present job.]]]
- - - - -
Meanwhile I have been writing in other formats, message board and email. And will get to the following (nfry), later.
- - - - -
When McCain Drops by Steve Rosenbaum
US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes
Broken Laws, Broken LivesPhysicians for Human Rights
Michael Reagan Should be charged for terrorism
or they are right, our freedoms are what gives us terrorists.
How could a wrong be so right? NOT!
She talks about the real America. Will she be heard?
In no particular order:
Kucinich: Impeachment Not "Off the Table"
I hope to be back to these links, but wish that they did not tie in so well, that more will be following. But I will summarize my feeling that McCain may be just a place holder in a strategy where there is too much to loose not to give it more than he's got, and that plays into the way I see them always playing it.
Meanwhile Obama has "flip-flopped"[**] on the Public Campaign Finance System but faces it in a more honest a principled manner than the media can follow or wishes to follow. While McCain may just be a distraction for a sleeper candidate, they cannot come up with one that should not be asked what he or she would do about holding history accountable.
* GE profits are a picture that may not fit full disclosure journalism, economics or environment, but then I acknowledge I don't fit or have the full picture either. Meaning I have taken digs at them, and it does not mean that profits are above principles or question, but that it is another story.
** The Catch-22 for them not us, but we*** can't help it. "Flip-flop" is a charge that was created by those that fear nuance or the work required to do their jobs or an attempt to do too many jobs or diminish those that see your own flip-flops, which maybe is all they can see, since this has created a loop. [[I did not intend to throw the book at a term, but then we are all about the Catch-44. And then there is the actual records. Not that I want to go there, but that may be one of the reasons we are here, with McCain a candidate, not his record, but the difficulty in facing it all, and the actions/reactions that brings.]]
*** "we" does depend on a job sometimes and who "them" is, not to mention the word.(While there may be some typo's or gramatical sloppiness in this post, this line have been double and triple checked mentally, not technologically.)
Monday, June 16, 2008
Belated and Preempted Father's Day
May Tim Russert Rest in Peace.
In my humble opinion, he was the best in a field that could do better.
Any comparisons would be possibly in other fields.
But being the Washington DC, Bureau Chief had its responsibilities and limitations.
The political connection and who one meets, and what the press is deserves as much as he gave and more.
My leap to Obama is a matter that others may regard as ill timed, but seems to be fit to be tied. For who are we to say? He took the opportunity to celebrate Father's Day by sending a message to a community. Some may take offense that he is saying what others have said and they could not get away with it. It might not just be who he is, but what and how and why he says it and to whom. Maybe a message and messenger the world and all communities need to get.
How does this get back to Russert? Being a father, messenger and a message maker may be more than a job description and more than any competition or a father can say.
Yet how appropriate is it to ask that words be carefully chosen, and to expect that a race mean more than a competition and a community mean more than a father, while not bringing new meaning to mother. It might take a village, but it also takes a government and a free press, not to mention respect for the law and our natures.
[For my own words and feelings, I missed much of his work, but cannot begrudge those that will miss him so dearly, no matter how they valued his work. Maybe my lack of pedestal for Tim Russert is the best testimonial to his being fair and balanced without quotation marks, in a so-called "Fair and Balanced" world which is a business and so much more.]
In my humble opinion, he was the best in a field that could do better.
Any comparisons would be possibly in other fields.
But being the Washington DC, Bureau Chief had its responsibilities and limitations.
The political connection and who one meets, and what the press is deserves as much as he gave and more.
My leap to Obama is a matter that others may regard as ill timed, but seems to be fit to be tied. For who are we to say? He took the opportunity to celebrate Father's Day by sending a message to a community. Some may take offense that he is saying what others have said and they could not get away with it. It might not just be who he is, but what and how and why he says it and to whom. Maybe a message and messenger the world and all communities need to get.
How does this get back to Russert? Being a father, messenger and a message maker may be more than a job description and more than any competition or a father can say.
Yet how appropriate is it to ask that words be carefully chosen, and to expect that a race mean more than a competition and a community mean more than a father, while not bringing new meaning to mother. It might take a village, but it also takes a government and a free press, not to mention respect for the law and our natures.
[For my own words and feelings, I missed much of his work, but cannot begrudge those that will miss him so dearly, no matter how they valued his work. Maybe my lack of pedestal for Tim Russert is the best testimonial to his being fair and balanced without quotation marks, in a so-called "Fair and Balanced" world which is a business and so much more.]
Friday, June 13, 2008
Stop the Precedent!
Investigate!
That's right!
If these seem too backward looking, then precedent is apparently really out the window. This is a simple argument. Use it or lose it. Or is all already lost?
The precedent I am asking to stop is the loss of precedent, by not just the president, but the judicial branch as well.
This is a cautious condemnation.
You will be condemning the rule of law and confirm a ridiculous proposal.
As McCain or his handlers put it:
"For too long, we have let history outrun our government's ability to keep up with it."
That's right!
If these seem too backward looking, then precedent is apparently really out the window. This is a simple argument. Use it or lose it. Or is all already lost?
The precedent I am asking to stop is the loss of precedent, by not just the president, but the judicial branch as well.
This is a cautious condemnation.
You will be condemning the rule of law and confirm a ridiculous proposal.
As McCain or his handlers put it:
"For too long, we have let history outrun our government's ability to keep up with it."
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
War prophets(fits)
The reason war is not the last resort,
is that reason doesn't fit the bill.
Wealth* of Nations?
UN Security Council?
International Agreements?
Invisible Hand?
Mis-Taken.
Preemptive war and even talk of it,
is an escalation of threat that others
feel they need to and in fact cannot preempt,
without being as ridiculous as those that presuppose it.**
[Loose links? - tightening grasp *** ]
*- buried - the link, the bottom line
Truly embedded in this link is hope.
** link added 6-12-08 and bold to featured links
*** [link added - here ]
is that reason doesn't fit the bill.
Wealth* of Nations?
UN Security Council?
International Agreements?
Invisible Hand?
Mis-Taken.
Preemptive war and even talk of it,
is an escalation of threat that others
feel they need to and in fact cannot preempt,
without being as ridiculous as those that presuppose it.**
[Loose links? - tightening grasp *** ]
*- buried - the link, the bottom line
Truly embedded in this link is hope.
** link added 6-12-08 and bold to featured links
*** [link added - here ]
Recent Ex-Changes
Recent exchanges have been about different thinking and feeling and how we deal with each other. It was interesting to see that some feel that Barack Obama is all (too much)about inspiration, yet others feel he lacks some evidence of feeling. Maybe it is just in the reporting, but Hillary was accused and fell flat on such accusations and her own seeming over reliance or manipulation of feelings. And then we have McCain. I won't go there. Maybe the media will, and so might McCain.
[Update - (satire)?) : in looking back I have found a few posts that need upgrade. [2-23-03 link added with minor editing for grammar.]
[Related: caricature -- The difference between caricature and reality is the difference between "liberal" and progressive. -- (just a thought) But in greater respect, it depends on how the words are used and by whom.]
[Recent exchanges: A. and B. and re:caricature and back again.]
[Update - (satire)?) : in looking back I have found a few posts that need upgrade. [2-23-03 link added with minor editing for grammar.]
[Related: caricature -- The difference between caricature and reality is the difference between "liberal" and progressive. -- (just a thought) But in greater respect, it depends on how the words are used and by whom.]
[Recent exchanges: A. and B. and re:caricature and back again.]
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
"...I'm running for President Bush's third term."
"You will hear..."(claims McCain.)
[out of context continued]
"Why does Senator Obama believe (back in context) it's so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he know's it is very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false."
Then he (back in The Irony) proceeds to describe Obama's agenda as he sees it, and repeats seven times: "That's not change we can believe in".
That is not exactly change that will change course.
[out of context continued]
"Why does Senator Obama believe (back in context) it's so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he know's it is very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false."
Then he (back in The Irony) proceeds to describe Obama's agenda as he sees it, and repeats seven times: "That's not change we can believe in".
That is not exactly change that will change course.
QCON and Flip-Flop: AN IRAN OUT
This is a quick comment on the news and a flip-flop on myself.
On Bush and Iran, there is hope **** that progress can be made.
It is all up to what Bush will accept and what Iran will agree to.
We could possibly "Trust but Verify" and any sort of solution depends on others
trusting what we can agree to. While any so-called enemy that might be "appeased" * has little record to base that on. Critics of the administration must hold them accountable and give aid to the "enemy" by assuring accountability, not politics. The big question is whether Iran can in any way accept restrictions on nuclear research while the administration accepts no accountability to international agreements. [NOT! **]
* quotation marks indicate fuzzy English except the Reagan remark.
[This is based only on a radio snippet of Bush's hopes for success.]
[**] - [ This IS an update from www.JustForeignPolicy.org thanks to Thom Hartmann having the Robert Naiman as guest, just prior to having John Bolton speak to the contrary I presume.]
[My original point is that there is always hope that diplomacy, even tough diplomacy, can work, as long as the other side of the table has a reasonable alternative to giving in to what is unreasonable, and if there is no hope that we will be reasonable, then standing fast is just as reasonable, in the light of unreason. While I am not charging unreason, just not open *** reason, while we find it hard to find reason on the other side.]
A. -
B. -
C. -
D. - Bingo!
*** it is often buried somewhere
[Myth? Pre-visited.
Connected back later.
And dialing in.]
[Mission Impossible Script Writers Guild. ]
**** link added 6-12-08
On Bush and Iran, there is hope **** that progress can be made.
It is all up to what Bush will accept and what Iran will agree to.
We could possibly "Trust but Verify" and any sort of solution depends on others
trusting what we can agree to. While any so-called enemy that might be "appeased" * has little record to base that on. Critics of the administration must hold them accountable and give aid to the "enemy" by assuring accountability, not politics. The big question is whether Iran can in any way accept restrictions on nuclear research while the administration accepts no accountability to international agreements. [NOT! **]
* quotation marks indicate fuzzy English except the Reagan remark.
[This is based only on a radio snippet of Bush's hopes for success.]
[**] - [ This IS an update from www.JustForeignPolicy.org thanks to Thom Hartmann having the Robert Naiman as guest, just prior to having John Bolton speak to the contrary I presume.]
[My original point is that there is always hope that diplomacy, even tough diplomacy, can work, as long as the other side of the table has a reasonable alternative to giving in to what is unreasonable, and if there is no hope that we will be reasonable, then standing fast is just as reasonable, in the light of unreason. While I am not charging unreason, just not open *** reason, while we find it hard to find reason on the other side.]
A. -
B. -
C. -
D. - Bingo!
*** it is often buried somewhere
[Myth? Pre-visited.
Connected back later.
And dialing in.]
[Mission Impossible Script Writers Guild. ]
**** link added 6-12-08
Cultural Terrorist Elite Jab
FOX Snipers Suffer Collateral Damage
Just a Tease?
WMD Virus Spreads.
Nation Rocked By Terrorist Youth
and their "New Fangled" Communications.
Meanwhile an economic fist bump and change?.
Just a Tease?
WMD Virus Spreads.
Nation Rocked By Terrorist Youth
and their "New Fangled" Communications.
Meanwhile an economic fist bump and change?.
Monday, June 09, 2008
Parsed (& Partied) Political Process
Debate!
(the rest I needed)
OK, I have some catching up to do,
but will probably not.
(rocking the boat ain't bad,
but not Gilligan's Island)
OK, I was out of touch for the weekend.
As far as the vote and third parties,
I feel that more competition will help the debate.
As long as people realize where their vote will lead.
Triangulation may be the change we can believe in * ,
but not the leader. My hope is that indepedents from the left or the right, (say Nader and Barr) will be included in the debate, where triangulation is a form of navigation based on principles, but also where practicality hits the road. Give the poor track record of the media, and the bifurcation -(Red and Blue America)- of the internet(unfiltered), expanded participation may better focus the dialogue, but don't forget the green.
[Nader, Barr, and Green?]
[I leave you and Green to search and speak for your selves.]
[*: under Geometry of Purpose: related efforts, links no longer appear, but my point was by contrast to Bill O'Reilly, and definitely not to agree with the parable nor what is still found at American Thinker.]
(the rest I needed)
OK, I have some catching up to do,
but will probably not.
(rocking the boat ain't bad,
but not Gilligan's Island)
OK, I was out of touch for the weekend.
As far as the vote and third parties,
I feel that more competition will help the debate.
As long as people realize where their vote will lead.
Triangulation may be the change we can believe in * ,
but not the leader. My hope is that indepedents from the left or the right, (say Nader and Barr) will be included in the debate, where triangulation is a form of navigation based on principles, but also where practicality hits the road. Give the poor track record of the media, and the bifurcation -(Red and Blue America)- of the internet(unfiltered), expanded participation may better focus the dialogue, but don't forget the green.
[Nader, Barr, and Green?]
[I leave you and Green to search and speak for your selves.]
[*: under Geometry of Purpose: related efforts, links no longer appear, but my point was by contrast to Bill O'Reilly, and definitely not to agree with the parable nor what is still found at American Thinker.]
Friday, June 06, 2008
In Humor...
Timing is Everything. [*]
Senate Report: Bush Used Iraq Intel He Knew Was False
Huffington Post [**]
and More Change We Can Believe In (Not)
6 Other Things that Aren't "Change We Can Believe In"
Timing We Can Believe In?
America's 40 Years War at an End
Last Laugh?
No More Drama
Not Really
McCain Supports Bush's Warrantless Wiretaps
All (nfry) Stay the Course
[Looking Back: yet having to MoveOn - Ouch!
But really, can McCain have his cake
and will Republicans eat it too? Seriously?
I don't know if we can, but there is more parsing to do,
and let's work on it.]
[*] - This link is serious.
It is the Y that is funny? - Why "Y"?
It is the political charges, not the satire,
or saY tire and/of political spin.[**]
And while I plan to take a rest, the rest will be revisited later,
but for now two things,
A. I may have not said it but I do feel for those who feel so strongly about their candidate and their cause,
B. In many of my previous writings, the seeming satire may not reflect that. But in particular the potential for third party or other candidates being spoilers and brokers, was an attempt to ward off, and prepare for a much later or parsed political process, and while sometimes seemingly satire, it is mostly just trying to run with other's rhetoric and feelings rather than just to rock the boat or the vote.
[**] Each of these spins(mine) have a Huffington Post link on them, followed by their title in bold.
Senate Report: Bush Used Iraq Intel He Knew Was False
Huffington Post [**]
and More Change We Can Believe In (Not)
6 Other Things that Aren't "Change We Can Believe In"
Timing We Can Believe In?
America's 40 Years War at an End
Last Laugh?
No More Drama
Not Really
McCain Supports Bush's Warrantless Wiretaps
All (nfry) Stay the Course
[Looking Back: yet having to MoveOn - Ouch!
But really, can McCain have his cake
and will Republicans eat it too? Seriously?
I don't know if we can, but there is more parsing to do,
and let's work on it.]
[*] - This link is serious.
It is the Y that is funny? - Why "Y"?
It is the political charges, not the satire,
or saY tire and/of political spin.[**]
And while I plan to take a rest, the rest will be revisited later,
but for now two things,
A. I may have not said it but I do feel for those who feel so strongly about their candidate and their cause,
B. In many of my previous writings, the seeming satire may not reflect that. But in particular the potential for third party or other candidates being spoilers and brokers, was an attempt to ward off, and prepare for a much later or parsed political process, and while sometimes seemingly satire, it is mostly just trying to run with other's rhetoric and feelings rather than just to rock the boat or the vote.
[**] Each of these spins(mine) have a Huffington Post link on them, followed by their title in bold.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
"The irony..."
(in turning pages)
It is not fair of me to pick on "a few" words that bring up age, since it is valid as well, that Obama is young, but not that he has bought in to what is old, but maybe what works. And McCain has bought in to change, but who has bought in to him? It is good that attitude is brought up as well as faith, not to mention the people. But it is not these words that must be brought up, but the forces of history that must be held up to scrutiny and evaluation.
* "for too long" we have let Bushisms outrun our media filters(them and us). Have they been vetted enough to not get used to this? [...this run around? and I just caught a mis-embedded link, bottom lined**, that fits. The Bush exit strategy may be a good example of a Catch-44. Where is McCain? [Let me make perfectly clear,*** the above block quotes are direct from McCain's speech and three paragraphs in the gap are commendable] Where will the Democrats be? And where have they and Republicans been in "your government". I was going to say the bold was on me, but it also on you and on them (?).
** previous post bottom link
*** bonus hint
[final comment: "The irony" is that McCain's words start a paragraph here as well as a serious tone, while it is ironic that I saw any humor (not) in age earlier.]
...is that Americans have been experiencing a lot of change in their lives attributable to these historic events, and some of those changes have distressed many American families-- job loss, failing schools, prohibitively expensive health care, pensions at risk, entitlement programs approaching bankruptcy, rising gas and food prices, to name a few. But your government often acts as if it is completely unaware of the changes and hardships in your lives. And when government does take notice, often it only makes matters worse. For too long, we have let history outrun our government's ability to keep up with it. * The right change will stop impeding Americans from doing what they have always done: overcome every obstacle to our progress, turn challenges into opportunities, and by our own industry, imagination and courage make a better country and a safer world than we inherited.(in three paragraphs ...we... can agree) but he continues.
The wrong change looks not to the future but to the past for solutions that have failed us before and will surely fail us again. I have a few years on my opponent, so I am surprised that a young man has bought in to so many failed ideas. Like others before him, he seems to think government is the answer to every problem; that government should take our resources and make our decisions for us. That type of change doesn't trust Americans to know what is right or what is in their own best interests. It's the attitude of politicians who are sure of themselves but have little faith in the wisdom, decency and common sense of free people. That attitude created the unresponsive bureaucracies of big government in the first place. And that's not change we can believe in.
It is not fair of me to pick on "a few" words that bring up age, since it is valid as well, that Obama is young, but not that he has bought in to what is old, but maybe what works. And McCain has bought in to change, but who has bought in to him? It is good that attitude is brought up as well as faith, not to mention the people. But it is not these words that must be brought up, but the forces of history that must be held up to scrutiny and evaluation.
* "for too long" we have let Bushisms outrun our media filters(them and us). Have they been vetted enough to not get used to this? [...this run around? and I just caught a mis-embedded link, bottom lined**, that fits. The Bush exit strategy may be a good example of a Catch-44. Where is McCain? [Let me make perfectly clear,*** the above block quotes are direct from McCain's speech and three paragraphs in the gap are commendable] Where will the Democrats be? And where have they and Republicans been in "your government". I was going to say the bold was on me, but it also on you and on them (?).
** previous post bottom link
*** bonus hint
[final comment: "The irony" is that McCain's words start a paragraph here as well as a serious tone, while it is ironic that I saw any humor (not) in age earlier.]
Turning the Page (2.0)
Turning the page (On Humor)?
[The following is the clean version(original)[*] : meaning I intend to clutter the above link]
(Seriously)
Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battle field),
I must look back.
Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front,
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes.
But communications* is a tricky field.
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry.
So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.
And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue and
used it as a weapon himself? Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?- [*]OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.
*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[*] -left behind - reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)
[*] except for speech links
[The following is the clean version(original)[*] : meaning I intend to clutter the above link]
(Seriously)
Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battle field),
I must look back.
Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front,
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes.
But communications* is a tricky field.
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry.
So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.
And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue and
used it as a weapon himself? Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?- [*]OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.
*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[*] -left behind - reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)
[*] except for speech links
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Turning the page (On Humor)?
[For orginal post go here]
- - - - - - - - - - - -
(Seriously)
Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battlefield), (1)
I must look back.
Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front, (2)
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes. (3)
But communications * - is a tricky field. (4)
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry. (5)
So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.
And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue (6)
and used it as a weapon himself?
Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?
OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.
*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[left behind: reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)
[this is the clutter I noted being added]
(1)footnote to other fields
(2)and this and more
(3) see middle link in particular
(4) trickle on
(5) or not (speaking of spelling) intended?
(6) this may be the final embedded version, I must now better filter the McCain speech that triggered this (these)Turning the Page(s); the humor and potential for change.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
(Seriously)
Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battlefield), (1)
I must look back.
Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front, (2)
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes. (3)
But communications * - is a tricky field. (4)
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry. (5)
So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.
And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue (6)
and used it as a weapon himself?
Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?
OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.
*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[left behind: reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)
[this is the clutter I noted being added]
(1)footnote to other fields
(2)and this and more
(3) see middle link in particular
(4) trickle on
(5) or not (speaking of spelling) intended?
(6) this may be the final embedded version, I must now better filter the McCain speech that triggered this (these)Turning the Page(s); the humor and potential for change.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Obama - Clinton?
Dream Team?
vs.
the Nightmare team?
TO BE DETERMINED
[Update: NOT inserted in perspective of 1st link above.
Flip-Flopper-Crafting
Or Bogeyman sighted. Or Hobbes Goblin?
Not to mention Escalus or Escalate
And again possible thanks goes to Rachel Maddow and her stand in, David Bender not that I pull in all of the web they weave but meaning I only caught and pulled a thread, was it something about Camelot?]
vs.
the Nightmare team?
TO BE DETERMINED
[Update: NOT inserted in perspective of 1st link above.
Flip-Flopper-Crafting
Or Bogeyman sighted. Or Hobbes Goblin?
Not to mention Escalus or Escalate
And again possible thanks goes to Rachel Maddow and her stand in, David Bender not that I pull in all of the web they weave but meaning I only caught and pulled a thread, was it something about Camelot?]
Open Threads
Open Sesame
Close Sesame
If only it was as simple as "enter" or hit any key,
but nevertheless the pages turn *. I have left open the past-or-gate**, and not closed many threads before, but for the time being, I will link to a comment that is rather fanciful or touching on a few ideas that weave through the myth of history.
[I started out this thread not knowing where I was going, but feeling that we had been there before. We had and Will be, still? (as noted here)]
* speaking of the afterlife, some links are dead (Red Labeling - Obama Baiting -)[valid reference- lost truthout link] yet we are about to move on [Hillary?].
** Obama has left one church, Lieberman may be considering affiliating with another
[lastly from below link - and to above few ideas:
Real conservatism cannot aspire to lofty principles, because its task is to defend what already exists. The conservative dilemma is that conservatism's legitimacy can come only from being proved right by events, whereas liberals, whenever they are proved wrong, have universal principles to fall back on. Samuel Huntington has always held liberal ideals. But he knows that such ideals cannot survive without power, and that power requires careful upkeep.]
Close Sesame
If only it was as simple as "enter" or hit any key,
but nevertheless the pages turn *. I have left open the past-or-gate**, and not closed many threads before, but for the time being, I will link to a comment that is rather fanciful or touching on a few ideas that weave through the myth of history.
[I started out this thread not knowing where I was going, but feeling that we had been there before. We had and Will be, still? (as noted here)]
* speaking of the afterlife, some links are dead (Red Labeling - Obama Baiting -)[valid reference- lost truthout link] yet we are about to move on [Hillary?].
** Obama has left one church, Lieberman may be considering affiliating with another
[lastly from below link - and to above few ideas:
Real conservatism cannot aspire to lofty principles, because its task is to defend what already exists. The conservative dilemma is that conservatism's legitimacy can come only from being proved right by events, whereas liberals, whenever they are proved wrong, have universal principles to fall back on. Samuel Huntington has always held liberal ideals. But he knows that such ideals cannot survive without power, and that power requires careful upkeep.]
Monday, June 02, 2008
Gatekeeper on a High Horse?
George F.* Will?rides on.
Gatekeepers are us?
George "Fiat" Will?
______________________________________________________________________
Speaking of the high road, the above may be rather high brow, and the following might be considered in the gutter or the trenches where we need to fight too.
______________________________________________________________________
[Re: the above (first two) links provide contrast and balance as well as rating (G.F.W.-P.G./R.W.F), but the bottom link(see warning as to "expletive deleteds" being unbeeped), and does not reflect my views but do provide more than adequate contrast in their own right. Harriet Christian manufactured? I don't know, but natural reactions? Maybe.]
[Update: And imagine the Gaul, Will had to write from Pearl Harbor not to mention bladder or the sheen]
*WARNING! Fowl language embedded in bottom link, not necessarily connected to the "F" between George and Will. But maybe Fear, Fiat, Foe, fumes?
Gatekeepers are us?
George "Fiat" Will?
______________________________________________________________________
Speaking of the high road, the above may be rather high brow, and the following might be considered in the gutter or the trenches where we need to fight too.
______________________________________________________________________
[Re: the above (first two) links provide contrast and balance as well as rating (G.F.W.-P.G./R.W.F), but the bottom link(see warning as to "expletive deleteds" being unbeeped), and does not reflect my views but do provide more than adequate contrast in their own right. Harriet Christian manufactured? I don't know, but natural reactions? Maybe.]
[Update: And imagine the Gaul, Will had to write from Pearl Harbor not to mention bladder or the sheen]
*WARNING! Fowl language embedded in bottom link, not necessarily connected to the "F" between George and Will. But maybe Fear, Fiat, Foe, fumes?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)